Examining ultrasound diagnostic performance improvement with utilization of maternal-fetal medicine tele-interpretation

BACKGROUND: Telemedicine can extend essential health services to under-resourced settings and improve the quality of obstetrical care. Specifically, the evaluation and management of fetal anomalies require perinatal subspecialists, rendering prenatal diagnosis essential, and may benefit from telemedicine platforms to improve access to care. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the impact of a maternalfetal medicine telemedicine ultrasound program on the diagnostic accuracy of fetal anomalies when used within practices where ultrasounds are interpreted by general obstetricians or family medicine physicians. STUDY DESIGN: This was a cross-sectional study of all patients receiving care at 11 private obstetrical practices and imaging centers who had obstetrical ultrasounds performed from January 1, 2020, to July 6, 2020. All ultrasounds were performed by sonographers remotely trained under a standardized protocol and interpreted by maternal-fetal medicine physicians via telemedicine. Ultrasound characteristics and interpretation were extracted from ultrasound reports. Before the introduction of maternal-fetal medicine telemedicine, all ultrasound interpretations were reviewed by general obstetricians and family medicine physicians with reliance predominantly on the sonographer's impression. The primary outcome was potential missed diagnosis of a fetal anomaly, defined as an ultrasound designated as normal by a sonographer but diagnosed with an anomaly by a maternal-fetal medicine physician via telemedicine. This outcome serves as a proxy measure for anomaly diagnoses that would likely be missed without the supervision of a maternal-fetal medicine physician. The characteristics of the potential missed diagnoses were compared by type of scan and fetal organ system in univariable analysis. Moreover, a survey was conducted for sonographers and obstetrical providers to assess their perceptions of ultrasound interpretation via telemedicine. RESULTS: Overall, 6403 ultrasound examinations were evaluated, 310 of which had a diagnosis of fetal anomaly by a maternal-fetal medicine physician (4.8%). Of the fetal anomalies, 43 were diagnosed on an anatomic survey (13.9%), and 89 were diagnosed as cardiac anomalies (28.7%). The overall rate of the potential missed diagnoses was 34.5% and varied significantly by type of ultrasound (anatomy scans vs other first-, second-, and third- trimester ultrasounds) (P<.01). Moreover, there were significant differences in the rate of the potential missed diagnoses by organ system, with the highest rate for cardiac anomalies (P<.01). CONCLUSION: Expertise in maternal-fetal medicine telemedicine improves the diagnostic performance of antenatal ultrasound throughout pregnancy. However, there are implications for improving the quality of antenatal care, such as ensuring appropriate referrals and site of delivery, particularly for cardiac anomalies.